Edition

Nuclear Zero After Crimea

IN THIS ISSUE: Nuclear zero after Crimea, BJP puts NFU nuclear policy in doubt, nuclear safety problems at N. Korea's Yongbyon nuclear facility?, senators press for sanctions threat over Iran's oil sales, Zarif: much difference still exists between Iran, G5+1, MOX sales could require subsidy.

Published on April 8, 2014

Nuclear Zero After Crimea

George Perkovich | National Interest

Today, five years after Prague, the idea of seeking to eliminate all nuclear weapons has nearly evaporated from international politics. Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine inflames memories of the Soviet invasion of Prague in 1968. Russia’s bullying leaders cling to nuclear weapons as badges of great power and bulwarks against Western and Chinese coercion. 

BJP Puts No-First-Use Nuclear Policy in Doubt

Times of India

The Bharatiya Janata Party, widely tipped to form the next government, pledged on Monday to revise India's nuclear doctrine, whose central principle is that New Delhi would not be first to use atomic weapons in a conflict. 

Nuclear Safety Problems at North Korea's Yongbyon Nuclear Facility?

Nick Hansen | 38 North

Recent commercial satellite imagery indicates that North Korea may have experienced problems ensuring an adequate water supply essential for the operation of reactor cooling systems at the Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center. 

Senators Press for Sanctions Threat Over Iran's Oil Sales

Diane Barnes | Global Security Newswire

U.S. Senate advocates of Iran sanctions urged President Obama to re-instate punitive steps against Iran if it sells more oil than a November deal allows.

Zarif: Much Difference Still Exists between Iran, G5+1

Fars News Agency

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said Tehran and the Group 5+1 have still many differences whose climax will be witnessed when the two sides start drafting the final deal.

MOX Sales Could Require Subsidy

Mary Orndorff Troyan | Greenville News

If the United States completes the South Carolina MOX plant, the federal government will subsidize the sale of the fuel to American utility companies, a top Energy Department official said.

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.